[Ascent] or [Mangos]? And Why?

[beukhof1]

[Ascent] or [Mangos]? And Why? :trumpet:

[MentaL]

[DjAligator]

Ascent
-more gm command and no so much lag
-for me it very easy to use and for all i think
-has bugs much but not all versions
Mangos
-no much gm command and much lag
-i don't try but i think it's some complicated don't know but i don't try ever
-don't have so much bugs

[beukhof1]

Noob

How to Ignore People - wikiHow

Ascent
-more gm command and no so much lag
-for me it very easy to use and for all i think
-has bugs much but not all versions
Mangos
-no much gm command and much lag
-i don't try but i think it's some complicated don't know but i don't try ever
-don't have so much bugs

Thats what is was thinking... so why not stop developing mangos.
I thinks the mangos developers should bring there knowlege and help make Ascent even beter.

[kazz]

mangos and ascent is coded in different languages, ascent is in c++ and mangos in c#

[DouglasF]

mangos and ascent is coded in different languages, ascent is in c++ and mangos in c#

Mangos is coded in C++...

[Espionage724]

Ascent
- Supports more players
- Has more GM commands
- More user friendly to me
- Loads of updates
- Commonly used by most Private Servers

Mangos
(This is only what I heard I never used Mangos)
- Doesn't support a lot of players
- Confusing Console

[FamineMK]

Mangos, and I've tried both.

Short explanation:

Either will work well if you follow the guides to the T. Personally I look at it as Quality over Quantity. I'd rather have 5-10 people connected at a time, and have a good live server feel to it than have 300,000 people connected to a server that feels sloppily put together.

But the server that can get the most recent versions out faster wins out with some people, which is why you see Ascent plastered all over Ragezone.

Long explanation:

Mangos goods:

Fewer bugs, but you have to wait (Sometimes a LONG TIME) for new client versions to be supported.

Scripting (Mob spell casting... boss fights etc.) far superior

GM/Admin commands are easier to use. Far less typing for the same commands used by ascent. Ascent and MaNGOS both use a "Tree branch" type system for commands, but you actually have to type out the entire branch for the Ascent commands. It was a pain in the ass, and difficult to memorize. This goes for the DB structure as well.

Mangos bads:

Long waits on new client versions accepted

Doesn't accept as many clients connected as Ascent. This however needs to be cleared up. VERY FEW private servers have 100+ people connected at once. Most have 10-20 on or fewer, therefore this downfall REALLY isn't that much of a problem. (Don't believe me... take a look at wowstatus.net) Also, any server on there that says N/A for the number of people connected, is most likely running MaNGOS. (It's a more popular server than ppl let on.)

Less customization of gm levels. To give players access to the kinds of commands in MaNGOS that you'd like, you have to change their security level. Each level is pre-determined, and not as customizable as the Ascent flags are initially. You can however manually change which commands go with what security levels by modding the DB.

[KingXCrosses]

short short short explanation

ascent: stable, more gm commands and more bugs
MaNGOS: less bugs, less stable easier gm commands

just a summary of what you guys said

[Ultra Spidey]

I resent that.
Ascent supports partial typing of GM commands. So things like .mo di <id> can come instead of .mod displayid <id>. Same goes for all other commands (.a, .ch, .l, etc)